Someday, B.C. will need more energy. "The question is when," wrote the joint review panel assessing the project. "A second question is what alternatives may be available when that day comes."

Unable to answer those questions, the panel asked the province to refer the project to the independent B.C. Utilities Commission -- something that has not happened.

"Justification must rest on an unambiguous need for the power and analyses showing its financial costs being sufficiently attractive as to make tolerable the bearing of substantial environmental, social and other costs," the panel's report said.

There are five key reasons why the Site C dam isn't justified.

1. It's bad business

Big hydro dams tend to cost a lot of money, take years to build, and bring one massive lump of power on-line in one fell swoop.

"We have absolutely no confidence that this is the least cost plan," says Richard Stout, executive director of the Association of Major Power Customers of B.C.

Building Site C would take eight years -- an eternity in the world of energy markets. Consider this: in the past five years, solar costs have dropped 80 per cent, while wind costs have dropped 35 per cent.

Even if the liquefied natural gas (LNG) industry takes off, it wouldn't justify building the dam. LNG plants are likely to be powered by natural gas and, even if they did use electricity, the power would be required before Site C became operational circa 2024, according to the panel.

4. We can't afford to flood farmland

The Site C dam would impact 13,000 hectares of agricultural land -- including flooding 3,800 hectares of farmland in the Agricultural Land Reserve (ALR), an area nearly twice the size of the city of Victoria.

In a nutshell: While mega dams may have been a bright idea in the 1960s, in 2014 there are smarter ways of generating electricity. Instead of toiling over an outdated project, let's move on to 21st Century energy solutions.